[enneract’s claim] : [“vandalism” by grangerhub]
[sparky’s denial of claim] : [done by individuals, not by grangerhub]
[enneract’s response] : invalid because [“you” (?) fucked people before ] = [“you” (?) will fuck people now] therefore = [it was done by grangerhub]
Nah. Bullshit logic. Perhaps it made more sense in your head than it did on a public forum post.
This claim is already invalid for the faulty logic I’ve shown above, but let’s assume that it holds true and see what you constituted as “misinformation” by “GrangerHub”.
I lack the experience and knowledge to debate this part adequately. The “editors” of the article claim it is a port, while you claim it is a fork because [reasons]. This appears to be a conflict of the usage of the term “fork” than an attempt at “misinformation”.
The most debatable aspect of the former quote is using the term “official”, seeing as Dark Legion Development is no more (Tremulous IP is up in the air). However, the former quote clearly specifies that said latest build isn’t even released and it (implied to be Tremulous 1.3) is Tremulous. Therefore, I agree it is incorrect, but it’s far from what any reasonable person would call “misinformation”. Just remove the word “official”.
You say these Wikipedia edits are about “petty politics” which is a strange statement coming from yourself, seeing as there is public record of you confessing that you seek the CODEZ™ for your own personal amusement.
tl;dr I fail to see anything in your OP establishing the claims you’ve made. Perhaps you would have seen more success, had you only pointed out the faults in these edits instead of making broad claims backed by faulty logic.